Russians doubt July launch of Discovery - hear rumours

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

earth_bound_misfit

Guest
Well looking on the bright side, (u have to find something bright about these delays <img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> ) it might be getting warm at nights down this way for my orbiter/ISS spotting. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p><p>----------------------------------------------------------------- </p><p>Wanna see this site looking like the old SDC uplink?</p><p>Go here to see how: <strong>SDC Eye saver </strong>  </p> </div>
 
S

shuttle_rtf

Guest
My opinion is I think she'll be going uphill about July 20.<br /><br />But my opinion counts for nothing. That is why I'm not a columnist <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />
 
G

grooble

Guest
I'm still betting on no launch this year. 6 months to go! Then i win $10 from shuttle guy!
 
S

shuttle_rtf

Guest
What do you think will be the reason for them remaining grounded? Debris/Frost/Slush? (yes, slush - that's the new one - well, as far as coverage of).<br /><br />That's the only thing I can see being an issue now. <br /><br />Stafford-Covey are rumoured to be about to put the boot in on their review (but that's a rumour - I can see them being ok as O'Keefe's got some weight on that board). Regardless - Griffin says they won't hold the launch/no launch decision.
 
S

steve82

Guest
"What do you think will be the reason for them remaining grounded"<br /><br />Certification paperwork!
 
R

radarredux

Guest
> <i><font color="yellow">What do you think will be the reason for them remaining grounded? Debris/Frost/Slush?</font>/i><br /><br />Cracks in landing gear. More failed sensors. Another problem with ISS forcing the crew to abandon it (this seems to be an on-going issue: another problem with an oxygen candle, loss of a Russian resupply rocket, etc.). There are lots of possibilities.<br /><br />But here is a thought from left field: NASA completely changes course.<br /><br />The initial assessment from the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS) is due by mid-July link -- before the next shuttle launch (?). While very unlikely I could see them drawing the following conclusions:<br /><br />"<i>ISS cannot be completed as planned by the retirement of the shuttle, and the ongoing $4 billion per year operational costs of the shuttle prevent new technologies from being developed. Therefore we recommend that the shuttle fleet be grounded immediately and the $4 billion be used to accelerate a shuttle-derived HLV, a crew transfer vehichle (CXV), and a Crew Exploration Vehicle to move humans and supplies between LEO and the Lunar surface. The Shuttle-derived HLV and CXV can be used to complete and support the ISS, and they have direct application to fulfulling the Vision for Space Exploration (VSE). Without freeing up the $4 billion per year from Shuttle operations, there is no reasonable expectation that significant advancement can be achieved on the VSE before NASA loses the support of Congress and the public and the VSE is canceled.</i>"</i>
 
S

shuttle_rtf

Guest
>Cracks in landing gear.<<br /><br />Well that's sorted. They found (and are repairing them) only in Atlantis. Discovery and Endeavour are fine.
 
R

radarredux

Guest
> <i><font color="yellow">..and how would a launch to Mars sound without doing true long-duration medical baseline missions ... The ISS is the only answer</font>/i><br /><br />I think this argument tends to be a grasping at straws to find some rationale for doing something with ISS after spending close to $100 billion on it (there is still a minimum of $25 billion needed to complete it). None of the recent discussions by Griffin or others about the future of NASA involves the ISS.<br /><br />In 2004 testimony Griffin basically said there is little scientific justification for completing ISS. It is probably the most expensive white elephant ever built.</i>
 
E

earth_bound_misfit

Guest
Google, I'm hoping SG wins that ten bucks! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p><p>----------------------------------------------------------------- </p><p>Wanna see this site looking like the old SDC uplink?</p><p>Go here to see how: <strong>SDC Eye saver </strong>  </p> </div>
 
H

holmec

Guest
lol <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>
 
H

holmec

Guest
I wonder why the pressure from Russia? We know its going to take time for the Discovery launch, as they are scrutinizing the orbiter and all other systems. Caution is our best bet now. Putting pressure on the situation won't help any.<br /><br />NASA should tell Russia in the words of Michael Angelo "It is done when it is done."<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>
 
S

shuttle_rtf

Guest
Sounds like a lot of positioning on the renewal of a cross-cooperation agreement.
 
E

elguapoguano

Guest
<font color="yellow">Sounds like a lot of positioning on the renewal of a cross-cooperation agreement.</font><br />Yeah, but the Russians have a point. The contract to use Soyuz as a crew escape vehicle expires soon. And that stupid Iran non-proliforation law has NASA's hands tied. Since the US cannot provide it's own crew escape/return ship, there is only one option. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#ff0000"><u><em>Don't let your sig line incite a gay thread ;>)</em></u></font> </div>
 
S

spacester

Guest
<font color="yellow">"It is done when it is done."</font><br /><br />Isn't that what the Russians said when we were waiting on Zvezda? Ah, the irony . . . <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts